M/S Re Sustainability Limited vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Facts
M/s Re Sustainability Limited (the applicant) filed an MCC application seeking recall or modification of an order dated 23.06.2026, which was passed in WPT No. 214 of 2024. The applicant's counsel claimed non-appearance on the hearing date was due to not receiving an allotment message, asserting the non-appearance was not deliberate and that the impugned order was passed in violation of natural justice. The State, represented by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, opposed the application, arguing that the writ petition was dismissed because an efficacious alternative remedy was available to the applicant under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017.
Held
The Court held that the MCC application was not maintainable. It noted that the order passed in WPT No. 214 of 2024 on 23.06.2026 indicated no appearance for the applicant in two rounds. The Court found that the order under challenge was appealable under Section 107 of the CGST Act, 2017, and since an efficacious alternative remedy was available, the writ petition was dismissed with liberty granted to prefer an appeal within 30 days. Referring to Rule 140 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Rules 2007, which permits MCC applications for restoration, modification, or classification in decided cases, the Court concluded that an application for recall of an order dismissed due to the availability of an alternative remedy does not fall within the scope of Rule 140. Therefore, the MCC application was dismissed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the MCC application for recall of the order dated 23.06.2026 is maintainable under Rule 140 of the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Rules 2007, considering the writ petition was dismissed due to the availability of an alternative remedy. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicant: Argued that the non-appearance of their counsel was unintentional and that the order under challenge violated principles of natural justice. They sought recall of the order dated 23.06.2026 to restore WPT No. 214 of 2024. Revenue/State: Contended that the writ petition was dismissed because an efficacious alternative remedy was available to the applicant under Section 107 of the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017, and therefore, the application for recall should be dismissed.
Sections Cited
Section 107, Rule 140
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
CGHC010267042026
2026:CGHC:31102
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR MCC No. 663 of 2026 1 - M/s Re Sustainability Limited Through Rajsesh Bamaniya Deputy Gereral Manager, 1st Floor Mishra Bada, Tatyapara Chowk Bhilai Durg Chhattisgarh
...Applicant versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Office Of Deputy Commissioner Of State Tax, Juri iction Raipur- 2, Raipur Division, Chhattisgarh State/ Ut, Chhattisgarh
... Non-applicant For Applicant Mr. Venkat Prasad, Advocate along with Ms. Anjali Lakhwani, Advocate For Non-applicant Mr. Keshav Gupta, GA
Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Judgment On Board 22.07.2026
Heard.
This MCC application has been filed seeking recall/modification of order dated 23.06.2026 passed in WPT No.214 of 2024. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the counsel for the applicant could not appear on the date of hearing, i.e., 23.06.2026, as no allotment message intimating the listing of the matter was received by him. He would contend that non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant wa
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.